“A dream week for the Democrats”

That is a sentence about as wrong as could be written following the first week of the impeachment “investigation”. You’d kinda wish that at least The Oz might send someone along to the impeachment clown show who can understand, at least a little, that there is no there there. Instead they send Cameron Stewart who takes responsibility for this: Theatrics can’t disguise a simple reality: Republicans not turning. It’s not Republicans who are not being convinced, no one else is either other than the vast number of morons who want PDT out for reasons that are not identified. This is from the article:

Now that the public hearings are over, at least for now, in the ­impeachment inquiry we are able to draw three conclusions from the evidence so far.

  1. The first is that Donald Trump appears to have done almost everything he is accused of in seeking to pressure Ukraine to ­investigate his political rival Joe Biden and his son Hunter.
  2. The second is that the Democrats are hurtling towards ­impeachment and believe they already­ have enough material to argue Trump committed “high crimes and misdemeanours”.
  3. The third is that the evidence so far has failed to move a single ­Republican, with most believing that even if Trump did what he is ­accused of, it’s not an impeachable offence.

It has been a dream week for the Democrats, who saw almost everything go right except for the most important part — persuading congressional Republicans to abandon Trump.

This means, of course, that they are likely to impeach Trump in the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives and Repub­licans are likely to acquit him in a trial in the GOP-controlled Senate. In other words, Trump emerges with the black eye of being only the third president to be impeached, but keeps his job, with every chance of being re-elected.

He might also have mentioned that there has not been an ounce of evidence that the President has undertaken an impeachable offence. One might even go farther and ask why the President should not be asking the Ukraine to investigate Hunter Biden. Remember this?

And all this on top of the illegal never mind immoral efforts by Obama and the Deep State to remove the elected president by any means necessary. The media are themselves the enemies of the people.

This entry was posted in American politics, Media, Politics of the Left. Bookmark the permalink.

101 Responses to “A dream week for the Democrats”

  1. Muddy

    the vast number of morons

    At least 70% of the Earth’s surface is covered by morons.

  2. classical_hero

    What on earth was that article? Dreams are not made of this, unless you are a supporter of the President.

  3. mareeS

    Having followed this farce since Trump.’s election, I was waiting for the next Democrat demand, which now that all else has failed , is a demand for Trump’s tax records. So why not demand all tax records of every representative and senator, and the full history of Obama? Oh…The Dems have no shots left in the locker.

  4. BorisG

    Citing Putin propaganda channel. Don’t have anything a little more credible?

  5. Not ‘one ounce’ of evidence of an ‘impeachable offence’. This is very poor analysis. There is some evidence that this was attempted bribery. Whether this amounts to proof is a question for someone looking at all the evidence. FWIW, mine is that it comes very close. If the evidence of what Guiliani said Trump said is classified not as hearsay but as a vicarious admission, then he could well be found to have attempted bribery. But we may guess that the Senate Judiciary Committee will ‘acquit’ him

  6. At the tail end of the earlier post about the proceedings I dealt briefly with vicarious admissions and some other matters that strengthened the Democrats case. Kates also fails to at least note that ‘misdemeanours’ embraces conduct fslling short of a crime.

  7. JC

    Rafki

    This is the problem with academics. They don’t live in the real world. Misdemeanours may not exactly mean a crime, however the American public most certainly want to see overwhelming evidence of such before they support impeachment. There has been only three attempts before that have succeeded.

    Unless there is a series crime, impeachment is not something the American public would support to remove a president.

  8. iain russell

    Biden’s son was a logical and proper appointment to the board of Burisma, and his $50-$80K a month renumeration was entirely appropriate. He had no experience in oil and gas, couldn’t speak Ukrainian or Russian and was a recovering alcoholic and drug addict. That appointment, while his father was VPOTUS, was a magnificent step forward in rehabilitation and ‘caring’. Don the Evil One had no reason or right to suspect anything, let alone have it investigated. Nothing to see here except goodness and light.

  9. JC – attempted bribery of the president of another country, to the purpose of harming a rival in the 2020 election seems pretty serious to me. That said, I suspect this charge won’t get past the Senate Judiciary committee. How it plays out in the 2020 race remains to be seen. Anyhow my purpose was to expose Kates’ shallow analysis.

  10. Gerry

    Rafiki, If hearsay wasn’t considered hearsay, and presumptions weren’t considered presumptions, and left leaning opinions were considered statements of fact then Trump may have been guilty of withholding military aid until he got proof that Zelensky was doing something about corruption in the Ukraine.

    But then, of course Zelensky said he wasn’t aware of any bribery or “quid pro quo”.

  11. struth

    Good lord, even on this thread we have people that obviously still listen to the MSM.

  12. Entropy

    Should the president have asked Ukraine about this Biden business or not?

    In my view, to not do so would be a dereliction of duty. Corruption should never be allowed.

  13. mh

    Cameron Stewart 🤦‍♂️ 🤦‍♀️

    I started reading free copies of the Oz in early 2016 to get the news on Trump. I did that for about 8 weeks, then stopped. Because I’m not insane.

  14. Herodotus

    Why The Australian persists in publishing Cameron Stewart’s trash pieces is a mystery only they can explain.

  15. And The Australian wonders why subscriptions are falling. They may as well copy articles directly from the NYT like The Age and ABC, as their ‘journalism’ doesn’t appear to be any better.

  16. Miltonf

    Well they used to publish George Megologenis so why not.

  17. mem

    This means, of course, that they are likely to impeach Trump in the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives and Repub­licans are likely to acquit him in a trial in the GOP-controlled Senate. In other words, Trump emerges with the black eye of being only the third president to be impeached, but keeps his job, with every chance of being re-elected

    .
    Where do you start with the errors. The House of Reps cannot impeach. Also this was framed as an impeachment, when in fact it is an impeachment inquiry. The Oz needs to up its intellectual power if it is to survive. Start by putting Cameron Stewart in the out bin.

  18. a happy little debunker

    There will be no impeachment.
    The last thing that Democrats want is a trial in the senate – where they lose control of this narrowly constructed fiction of ‘he & she said’.

    They are practising the age old stratagem – throw enough mud and some will stick.

  19. MyOwn

    1.Bill Clinton’s administration enacted a law that specifically requires that the president must officially ask the Ukraine president to investigate possible corruption by US citizens in that country.
    2. Not one witness brought forth by the Dem’s actually received or was verbally given a direction by the president for quid pro quo
    3. Both the Ukraine president and their ambassador have both stated that they were was not any quid pro quo
    4. The aid was released before any investigation was started by Ukraine
    5. The dem’s switched to bribery’because their PR people told them the american people did not understand quid pro quo

  20. Iampeter

    And all this on top of the illegal never mind immoral efforts by Obama and the Deep State to remove the elected president by any means necessary.

    There is nothing illegal about impeachment and nothing immoral about impeaching this particular President merely because you assert it.

    This is Alex Jones level of coverage.

  21. Iampeter

    Where do you start with the errors. The House of Reps cannot impeach. Also this was framed as an impeachment, when in fact it is an impeachment inquiry.

    That’s not an error. The House of Reps votes to impeach.
    The Senate will determine whether an impeached President should be removed or not.

  22. struth

    The House of Reps cannot impeach.

    That’s not an error. The House of Reps votes to impeach.

    It’s still a fact that the house of reps cannot impeach.

    They can vote for an activity for others to perform, but they cannot participate in it.

    So original statement is correct, and you are just here to do what you always do.
    Argue, due to being filled with envy and hate , like a moron, because you have no reading and comprehension skills.
    You end up confused and make a constant dick of yourself.

  23. struth

    There is nothing illegal about impeachment and nothing immoral about impeaching this particular President merely because you assert it.

    There needs to be a high crime or misdemeaner to start impeachment.

    This is an inquiry to see if there has been a crime, and so far zilch, nothing.

    Unless you have solid evidence you can put forward, no one else has.
    Now, you’ve told us many times how you are the only right winger on the planet who knows what he is talking about, so enlighten the world of dummies………………………………..where’s the crime, or what reason is there even for the inquiry?

  24. bruce

    Read the transcript of the phone call. That’s hard evidence. Nothing nothing nothing there.
    Cameron Stewart is the main reason I cancelled my Oz subs a couple of years ago. Infuriating bias.
    Richard Arnold 2GB newsman in the US is just as bad.

  25. Rafiki
    #3242552, posted on November 23, 2019 at 4:49 am

    JC – attempted bribery of the president of another country, to the purpose of harming a rival in the 2020 election seems pretty serious to me.

    You are either reading Stewart at face value or haven’t read the transcript.

    “NO QUID QUO PRO…”

    A direct order to obey the law now is evidence of committing a crime?

    The fuck outta here with your bullshit.

  26. Iampeter

    It’s still a fact that the house of reps cannot impeach.

    They can vote for an activity for others to perform, but they cannot participate in it.

    The voting to impeach IS the impeachment.
    The Senate decides whether an impeached President is removed or not. They do not decide impeachment.

    In other words, if the House of Reps votes to impeach and it passes, but the Senate votes against removing Trump, he will remain in office but still be an impeached President.

    This is an inquiry to see if there has been a crime, and so far zilch, nothing.

    No it’s not. This is an impeachment inquiry and doesn’t require any crimes.

  27. Impeachment is like an indictment and committal, the Senate holds the trial.

  28. mem

    The voting to impeach IS the impeachment.

    Poppycock and twisting the facts to suit the lefts narrative.

  29. Seco

    John Brumble
    #3242617, posted on November 23, 2019 at 7:38 am
    How dare an American president withhold aid and assistance until the other country cleans up its act.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/obama-administration-ends-long-hold-on-military-aid-to-egypt/2015/03/31/6f528c2c-d7d6-11e4-8103-fa84725dbf9d_story.html

    F* me but TDS is ridiculous.

    Not only are people beyond Democrats and the media (but I repeat) not interested in this they’re also fully aware Trump is being held to a completely different standard than any other president and previous ones have done far worse and got away with it. Trump’s swamp draining exercise has exposed what a corrupt bunch of criminals the swamp contains and how in bed with the Democrats the MSM actually are.

    IamPeter, Rafiki etc, like the MSM still don’t realise we also have access to the internet. We see right through the bullshit.

  30. struth

    Again, confused and with poor reading comprehension, you make a dick of

    yourself and prove my point.

    I’ll type slowly for you.
    Yes, this is just the inquiry.
    If no crime is found they cannot vote to impeach, well they would be stupid to.
    If they do, then it is sent to the senate to decide, via a trial where the chief justice must be present.

    Comprehend?
    If people here are saying that the house of reps cannot impeach without there being a crime, they are saying that it has zero effect on removing a president and can and in this case, will be, thrown out by the Senate, making a mockery of the system and again, by the left, trashing institutions.

  31. The Senate also has unreviewable powers to run the trial as they see fit, subject to the 2/3 clause to convict/remove from office.

    This is such a waste of time.

  32. Indolent

    The media are themselves the enemies of the people.

    Yes.

  33. Mark M

    Trump: ‘Historic’ Durham Investigation Will Implicate Obama in Spygate

    “Now, what you’re going to see, I predict, will be perhaps the biggest scandal in the history of our country, political scandal,” Trump said.
    “You have a FISA report coming out which the word is, it’s historic, that is what the word is.
    That’s what I hear.
    And if it’s historic, you will see something.
    And then perhaps even more importantly you have Durham coming out shortly thereafter.
    He is the U.S. Attorney and he is already announced it’s criminal.”

    https://pjmedia.com/trending/trump-historic-durham-investigation-will-implicate-obama-in-spygate/

    There is one election promise yet to be fulfilled.

    MAGA.

  34. Mother Lode

    The remaining subscription payers at the Paywallian should send in comments predicting the actual outcome and their reasons (I.e. There is no evidence, merely a wish that there was evidence).

    Then, when the whole thing goes nowhere the commenters can point out hat they were right with nothing more than internet access than Stewart was with the same plus a trip to the US plus his j’ismist credentials plus his experience plus his access to the NYT, and query whether the Paywallian is treating (and paying) Stewart as if he is credible.

  35. Mother Lode

    In my view, to not do so would be a dereliction of duty. Corruption should never be allowed.

    Oh, no!

    The way things should be is that politicians (or their various hangers on) should be able to commit crimes confident that their own party will not investigate them and other parties will not investigate them because that would be politicising the process

  36. nb

    struth at #3242557, posted on November 23, 2019 at 5:22 am
    ‘Good lord, even on this thread we have people that obviously still listen to the MSM.’
    So true.
    1) There was no quid pro quo. According to Sondland Trump specifically said no quid pro quo. The transcript shows no quid pro quo. As Scott Adams has pointed out, Trump is a negotiator. Why would his first offer be to pay for something he can get for free?
    2) What does it matter anyhow? Is there any doubt that the American people would be interested in this aspect of Biden as a presidential candidate. Should Trump not be able to access this info? It requires no fake FISA warrants or anything else. The info is there for the picking.
    3) Given the activity of just about everything the Democrats did during the 2016 election (Russiagate, all that), and given Biden’s actions in Ukraine, anything Trump has done is a big zero by comparison, even at the harshest interpretation.
    4) Bribery? The democrats have floated this meme and already dropped it after just a few days.
    5) Is a US president supposed to negotiate by offering everything and asking for nothing?
    6) ‘A dream week for the Democrats’ as they watched Trump’s polling ratings rise and viewer ratings for the ‘inquiry’ plummet. Really?
    7) Why buy the Oz? Why pay the slightest attention to the MSM?

  37. Just check out the latest:

    Former Vice President Joe Biden threatened Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) for launching an investigation into his activities with Ukraine while in the Obama White House, stating the Republican will “regret” the move his “whole life.”

    Can you imagine the outcry if a Republican said anything like this?

  38. Cynic of Ayr

    Although many words have been written about the bastardy, lying, scheming Democrats, one that sticks out for me is, “We must impeach, or else he will be re-elected.”
    (Green and Pelosi I think. Green anyway. Note the absolute absence of any other reason, a crime, a misdemeanor, bad judgement. It has nothing to do with behavior, other than he will be re-elected by the people. To quote, Trump’s crime was to defeat Clinton.)
    Those words can be re-written thus, “We must impeach because we do not want to allow the people to elect the President they want. Only the President we want must be elected.”
    Now, being a cranky cynical old bastard, if I was a Citizen of the good ol’ US of A, that would be sufficient for me to vote for Trump, no matter what the hell he did!

  39. OldOzzie

    Impeachment Theater Offers Americans Glimpse Of The Unseen-Unelected Who Actually Rule Over Us

    American voters have been introduced to the idea that the elected President of the United States can be accused of “undermining” foreign policy determined by the permanent bureaucracy, which spends billions of our tax dollars but is not even slightly interested in our input.

    We’ve been told top bureaucrats who supposedly serve at the pleasure of the president are actually entitled to their jobs and firing them is a crime, with the president presumed guilty unless he can prove he had an acceptable reason for terminating or reassigning them.

    We’ve learned that Made Men of the bureaucratic empire and its political wing, the Democrat Party, cannot be investigated for corruption unless the most exquisite preliminary rituals are followed and the investigators can demonstrate the absolute purity of their intentions.

    Outside of Impeachment Theater, we’ve been told it’s heroic for the bureaucracy to organize “resistance” against the elected president and congressional representatives, if the Washington empire disapproves of the voters’ choices.

    We’ve discovered obscure lower-court judges can hijack entire segments of national policy on a whim. Some of these imperial proclamations have been expressly premised on the notion that American citizens have less to say about their own government than foreign nationals do.

    We’ve learned a president the imperial bureaucracy likes can issue executive orders that cannot be reversed by presidents it disapproves of. The people are belatedly informed that some matters are settled forever on the “one man, one vote, one time” principle. The essence of self-government, the true right that matters above all others, is the right to say “no.”

    We’ve learned over the past three years that the American people no longer have that right in most cases, but their nominal employees in the federal government do. If the imperial bureaucracy makes a demand of you, good luck with trying to work up a “resistance” movement. Good luck getting any favorable attention from the media that has fused with that bureaucracy and enjoys a revolving door of employment with it. But if you, the Little People, cast votes the imperial bureaucracy doesn’t like… well, watch out. They’ll fight you every step of the way and spend untold millions of YOUR dollars against you. Then they’ll get in front of cameras and expect you to applaud them as heroes. It was always a swindle to convince the American people that democracy serves as a failsafe check against authoritarian power.

    We were fooled into thinking our government could never become dictatorial, no matter how much power it claims, because we can always vote the bums out. Guess what, kids? As we’ve seen since 2017, most of the power and money is controlled by people you never get to vote against. You learn that the people you don’t vote for are very capable of defending their privileges against the people who DO. And you learn that far more issues than you ever suspected are considered “settled.”

  40. OldOzzie

    John Solomon Drops 28 Uncomfortable Facts Crushing The ‘Debunked Conspiracy Theory’ Narrative

    So I want to exercise my right to debate Lt. Col. Vindman about the testimony he gave about me. You see, under oath to Congress, he asserted all the factual elements in my columns at The Hill about Ukraine were false, except maybe my grammar

    Here are his exact words:

    “I think all the key elements were false,” Vindman testified.

    Rep. Lee Zeldin, R-N.Y, pressed him about what he meant. “Just so I understand what you mean when you say key elements, are you referring to everything John Solomon stated or just some of it?”

    “All the elements that I just laid out for you. The criticisms of corruption were false… Were there more items in there, frankly, congressman? I don’t recall. I haven’t looked at the article in quite some time, but you know, his grammar might have been right.”

    Such testimony has been injurious to my reputation, one earned during 30 years of impactful reporting for news organizations that included The Associated Press, The Washington Post, The Washington Times and The Daily Beast/Newsweek.

    And so Lt. Col. Vindman, here are the 28 primary factual elements in my Ukraine columns, complete with attribution and links to sourcing. Please tell me which, if any, was factually wrong.

    Lt. Col. Vindman, if you have information that contradicts any of these 28 factual elements in my columns I ask that you make it publicly available. Your testimony did not.

    If you don’t have evidence these 28 facts are wrong, I ask that you correct your testimony because any effort to call factually accurate reporting false only misleads America and chills the free debate our Constitutional framers so cherished to protect

  41. Iampeter

    Again, confused and with poor reading comprehension, you make a dick of
    yourself and prove my point.

    There’s no confusion or misreading on my part. I’ve just done what I always do and demonstrated you have no idea what you’re talking about. No amount of your evasions, projections or ad hominem is going to change this fact. You’re just doubling down and beclowning yourself as per usual.

    Impeachment Theater Offers Americans Glimpse Of The Unseen-Unelected Who Actually Rule Over Us

    Impeachment can’t do any such thing as it is a perfectly legitimate, constitutional process, with current rules being followed as written by conservatives in 2015.

  42. mh

    Paul Krugman
    ‏@paulkrugman
    One side lesson from this inquiry is that the Deep State contains some really impressive, principled people. Which is why Trump hates it so much

    7:27 AM – 21 Nov 2019

  43. Former Vice President Joe Biden threatened Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) for launching an investigation into his activities with Ukraine while in the Obama White House, stating the Republican will “regret” the move his “whole life.”

    Simple ad. Associate Biden’s speech with real and fictional mafia characters.

  44. stackja

    Petering out posting again. Much scrolling, scrolling…

  45. There is zero chance Pelosi will impeach and send this to the Senate for a trial.
    At a Senate trial, Trump will be able to call witnesses, including the Bidens.
    No chance Pelosi will allow the exposition of the corrupt money laundering and grafting scheme conducted by the Bidens, Kerry’s and even Pelosi’s own son in the already corrupt Ukraine. Millions were laundered and grafted.

    Pelosi will “censure” the President and ask him to apologise (for it’s not worth dividing further an already divided nation donchaknow).
    Trump will tell her to go pound sand because he did nothing wrong. Media will run with the Pelosi narrative all through 2020 until the election.
    Trump is corrupt
    Trump would have been impeached if not for the kindness of Pelosi
    Trump shouldn’t be re-elected
    Yada yada yada

    No impeachment, just censure.
    Watch.

  46. Bruce of Newcastle

    Pelosi will “censure” the President and ask him to apologise

    She’s already called upon him to resign.
    “Worse than Nixon”: Pelosi calls for Donald Trump’s resignation (their ABC, 18 Nov)
    That’s the tactic: pound away with ‘he must resign for the good of the country like Nixon666’.
    The MSM will run this 24/7 until the election and beyond.

  47. OldOzzie

    mh
    #3242766, posted on November 23, 2019 at 10:23 am
    Paul Krugman
    ‏@paulkrugman

    One side lesson from this inquiry is that the Deep State contains some really impressive, principled people. Which is why Trump hates it so much

    7:27 AM – 21 Nov 2019

    Paul Krugman: Always Wrong, Never in Doubt

    He’s a stopped clock who has yet to be right about Trump.

    One of the nation’s leading doomsayers has been the New York Times’ perpetually mistaken Paul Krugman, who warned shortly after the 2016 election that Trump’s victory would trigger a global recession “with no end in sight.” We could file that under “post-election hysteria,” but as late as April of this year he was still telling crowds that the bond-market signals predicted “a pretty good chance of a recession sometime in the next year or so.” And he has kept this going all year:

  48. Kneel

    “There is zero chance Pelosi will impeach and send this to the Senate for a trial.”

    Correct – for the reasons you noted.
    It’s all a show that their mates in the YSM (Yellow Stream Media – piss and cowardice) will promote non-stop in an effort to “do the right thing” (by their own interests, of course!).
    YSM will have a hard time convincing Americans PDT = Hitler – at least, not Republicans, and not independents. Even Dimocrap voters will be sceptical after the “Russia Collusion” nothing-burger, the “piss on the prostitutes” lies, the “Russian interference” crap ($100k on facebook ads, most of which were not seen or not shown until after the election, and Dimocraps have said $100k is “pocket change” for electioneering) et al ad nauseum.
    Don’t think so?
    Check out what happened to CNN’s ratings once Mueller had his day – through the floor! The only reason it’s not even lower is the viewers who have no choice – airport departure lounge, bar etc.

    “Citing Putin propaganda channel.”
    Ask Larry King what he thinks. He has said, on air, “RT is the only channel doing news any more – CNN don’t do news, Fox don’t do news, all those guys do is opinion dressed up as news”.

  49. Russian Toady is awful, but at times it is the best of a very bad bunch.

  50. Rob MW

    Ukraine is just Russia by another name. They wanted more of the west’s money and got scared at DJT’s narrative about the failing NATO finances so they jumped into the 2016 election with the support of the other Baltic States, who rely on NATO for security and other people’s money to keep meh Russia at bay, and found any number of Ukrainian Russians willing to tell the world that DJT was a Russian asset.

    The whole B/S starts and ends with Ukraine and the Baltic States. Putin is just a fence sitter watching the best bullshiters in the world in action. He may yet recruit them, but I think the bullshiters would even hold Putin’s mob out to piss.

  51. mh

    Old Ozzie, the reason for quoting Krugman is to highlight that the MSM now openly recognises the operation of an unelected ‘Deep State’.

    They have gone from Alex Jones conspiracy theory to the Deep State exists but it’s a good thing.

  52. Iampeter

    There is zero chance Pelosi will impeach and send this to the Senate for a trial.

    I think this is correct but not for the reasons you think, nor do I interpret that as a win for those of us who are actually Right Wing.
    The issues for Democrats with voting to impeach is that today’s conservatives have no principles and will not vote to remove in the Senate. It’ll be more theater that Trump can exploit by playing the victim card. It’s much easier to take this crippled President to the next election where he will effectively be the Hillary candidate without impeaching him, but just censoring him.

    But this is a big loss to those of us who are Right Wing because Trump is an unmitigated disaster. He is a Left Wing President dragging the Overton window further left. Having supported an anti-trade, anti-immigrant, out-of-control spending, leftist like Trump, conservatives no longer have any credibility as opponents of the Left.
    This is like what happened with the conservative movement and Howard in Australia only on a grander scale.
    More than that, Trump has demonstrated that you can behave in a pretty unhinged manner as head of state and not suffer any consequences, which will serve to shift the way we conduct politics into a more unhinged and anti-intellectual direction.

    Keep Trump or impeach Trump, either way the Left is currently winning.
    Personally I think showing that American elected representatives have some spine and won’t put up with just any random lunacy, by impeaching Trump, would be better than leaving him.

  53. candy

    It’s okay to hate Trump, Iampeter. Lots of people here in Australia do, but nearly always it’s about his
    presentation, his hairstyle, clothes, size of his hands, smile, how awful they think his wife and family are, what he eats, how he talks etc. Over and over this is what the media says about him too.

    Nothing about employment being the best for some 45 years, reducing involvement in useless deadly wars,
    trying to regain USA’s standing in the world as a trade and economic powerhouse.

    No it’s about his hair. lol.

  54. FelixKruell

    It’s not Republicans who are not being convinced, no one else is either other than the vast number of morons who want PDT out for reasons that are not identified.

    Polls suggest otherwise.

    He might also have mentioned that there has not been an ounce of evidence that the President has undertaken an impeachable offence.

    We just had a week of evidence. Cameron summarised it very well.

  55. JC

    Polls suggest otherwise.

    The polls are basically even money, you dishonest Bobbsey. That’s not a pad to be launching an impeachment rocket from.

    FMD, you lie. You lie every single time. In fact you would lie even when telling the truth would help you more.

    And impeachment DOES NOT mean supporting getting rid of the president.

    Stop lying, you worthless sack of shit.

  56. JC

    Seriously, the bobbsey twins ought to be thrown off the site. Their mendacious lying and general dishonesty is hyper.

  57. Iampeter

    Seriously, the bobbsey twins ought to be thrown off the site. Their mendacious lying and general dishonesty is hyper.

    Yea the only two people that can’t honestly be described this way should be thrown off the site.

    Obviously what’s missing at the Cat is more unhinged ranting and raving of imbeciles.

  58. Iampeter

    Nothing about employment being the best for some 45 years, reducing involvement in useless deadly wars,
    trying to regain USA’s standing in the world as a trade and economic powerhouse.

    No it’s about his hair. lol.

    Yea I agree political discourse is a joke, but I think suggesting Trump is any way responsible for a booming economy (if you believe certain metrics) falls into the same category as talking about his hair.
    I bet those same people are not going to be taking ownership for the state of the economy when the new bubbles burst, even though Trump will have as little to do with that as he does with it’s current supposed boom.

    A proper coverage of Trump would still be negative, it would just be based on fundamentals, discussed by people who actually know something about politics. That’s what we just don’t have today.

    I’d also add that character is important too and his behavior is pretty bad. Just his behavior on twitter alone would have actions taken within organizations to ensure have a change in leadership. He’s a man who isn’t just left wing but also of very poor character.

    That’s why I think if conservatives wanted to really save face, they would get rid of him, if for no other reasons than to prove that they expect a certain level of conduct from people who would lead their party and the United States.

  59. mh

    He’s a man who isn’t just left wing but also of very poor character.

    Successful life long capitalists like Donald Trump are often like that, Peter.

  60. Iampeter

    Successful life long capitalists like Donald Trump are often like that, Peter.

    Trump isn’t a capitalist. You don’t seem to know what “capitalist” really means and I think you’ve confused it with “businessman.” Which Trump also is not.

    Don’t worry though. This is only Australia’s Leading Right Wing blog. Can’t expect people to know what “capitalism” means.

    Politics!

  61. mh

    Thanks, Peter.

    Best I do the Ayn Rand correspondence course quick smart!

  62. FelixKruell

    JC:

    And impeachment DOES NOT mean supporting getting rid of the president.

    Errr sure.

    You keep making stuff up that you think I’ve said, then start screaming that I’m lying. Get some help. Dementia is a terrible affliction.

  63. JC

    Trump isn’t a capitalist.

    Correct. Compared to High Cheeks he’s isn’t. High Cheeks is who you support, you raving far left lunatic.

    Now define capitalism, numbnut. Go!

  64. JC

    Plodes Bobbsey is like a poor man’s version of Homer Paxton who spent years telling us we wouldn’t understand. At least Paxton was good with puns. Plodes has the sense of humour of a rock lobster and just as intelligent.

  65. Dr Fred Lenin

    There is no corruption in thr wonderfull decromat party , they do not tolerate it The clintons are both charitable saints like St Greta , our millions given by the two joolies is spent on ejykayshin , Biden didnt make the threats he said he did ,his son is a highly qualified junkie and pisspot . Obama wasnt bought and paid for by soros , his mate ,the $30 million he got for not writing a book did not come ftom soros . <Fauxcahontas is really 106 per cent chickeree ,the decromats attract the most altruistic group of crims you can find . Very much like our own beloved alp/gangrenes all heart .
    (Thats my job application for the guardian ,how do you think I will go ? )

  66. Elderly White Man From Skipton

    Kates must be the only person on the planet who doesn’t know why people think Trump should be fired. The evidence is plain and comes from people who are credible. Even his own buddy Sondland says it was a quid pro quo arrangement, involving all the President’s men.

  67. JC

    It’s time for bed in the nursing home, Skip. Get ready. Come back in the morning and have another go as you’re not thinking straight at this time of day. Thanks.

  68. Even his own buddy Sondland says it was a quid pro quo arrangement, involving all the President’s men.

    Why are you blatantly lying, white trash?

    1) There was no quid pro quo. According to Sondland Trump specifically said no quid pro quo. The transcript shows no quid pro quo.

    Is Joe Biden really the dung heap you’re prepared to metaphorically die on?

  69. BorisG

    There was no quid pro quo. According to Sondland Trump specifically said no quid pro quo. The transcript shows no quid pro quo.

    Yes after he was made aware of the whistleblower complaint.

  70. So did he recant Boris or are you just saying the Dem’s prosecution counsel argued so poorly that they contaminated their own evidence?

  71. Trump isn’t my idol.

    I just don’t have a deranged hatred of the fat fucker so much that I want America to abandon the rule of law and democracy.

    As for idols…you have to ask why leftist dissembling turds like Felix and White Trash are dying on a dung heap for Creepy Joe Biden of all people.

  72. …you have to ask why leftist dissembling turds…are dying on a dung heap for Creepy Joe Biden…

    Because they’d prefer a Pyrrhic victory rather than accept what they hate.

  73. mh

    Just a quick survey.

    Felix, Elderly White Man, BorisG,

    Do you agree with Iampeter that Donald J. Trump is NOT a businessman?

  74. BorisG

    Do you agree with Iampeter that Donald J. Trump is NOT a businessman?

    No.

  75. BorisG

    So did he recant Boris or are you just saying the Dem’s prosecution counsel argued so poorly that they contaminated their own evidence?

    Not sure what you mean. Trump directed his people to press for announcement of Biden investigation as a condition for White House meeting with Zelensky. But at the same time Trump said there was no quid pro quo. Contradiction? Is this the first time with Trump?

  76. Sondland said that Trump said (paraphrasing) “I want nothing from Zelenski, I just want him to do the right thing”. Linked with other evidence (in particular Guiliani’s statements) the ‘right thing’ is a 2016 investigation and a Bidens inquiry.

  77. JC

    And you make the linkage with what, rafki? Super glue?

    How about this novel idea. Simply accept the meaning of words used and avoid hallucinating what you think he said along with linkage.

  78. Rafiki
    #3243293, posted on November 23, 2019 at 8:36 pm

    Sondland said that Trump said (paraphrasing) “I want nothing from Zelenski, I just want him to do the right thing”. Linked with other evidence (in particular Guiliani’s statements) the ‘right thing’ is a 2016 investigation and a Bidens inquiry.

    You’re making a lot of presumptions.

    But hey. What if Biden is corrupt, and didn’t just technically abuse his power to invetigate an actual crime, not a process crime?

  79. I have blogged this before.

    Christine Blasey Ford, Rep. Eshoo and Sen. Feinstein ought to be in gaol for the farce they perpetuated against the US Congress and Justice Kavanaugh.

    It was outright fraud. Follow the whole story. Eshoo, Ford and Feinstein along with a Dem. contributor cooked the whole thing up.

    https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1001

    18 U.S. Code § 1001. Statements or entries generally

    (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully—
    (1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
    (2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
    (3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
    shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years.

    (b) Subsection (a) does not apply to a party to a judicial proceeding, or that party’s counsel, for statements, representations, writings or documents submitted by such party or counsel to a judge or magistrate in that proceeding.
    (c) With respect to any matter within the jurisdiction of the legislative branch, subsection (a) shall apply only to—
    (1) administrative matters, including a claim for payment, a matter related to the procurement of property or services, personnel or employment practices, or support services, or a document required by law, rule, or regulation to be submitted to the Congress or any office or officer within the legislative branch; or
    (2) any investigation or review, conducted pursuant to the authority of any committee, subcommittee, commission or office of the Congress, consistent with applicable rules of the House or Senate.

    Never forget this “gem”:

    https://twitter.com/McCormackJohn/status/1044997880384245761

    John McCormack
    ‏Verified account @McCormackJohn

    What?!?

    “Ms. Swetnick grew up in Montgomery County, Md., graduating from Gaithersburg High School in 1980 before attending college”

    She was attending high-school parties where gang rapes occurred while a college student

    Ah yes more lunatic stuff:

    https://www.salon.com/2018/09/08/brett-kavanaughs-perjury-avalanche-50-years-in-the-making/

  80. BorisG

    Christine Blasey Ford, Rep. Eshoo and Sen. Feinstein ought to be in gaol for the farce they perpetuated against the US Congress and Justice Kavanaugh.

    How do you know they lied? kavanagh could sue them but he did not.

  81. Bryce

    Kavanagh is a public person in USA. Even with proven malicious intent, he can’t win a court case for libel.

  82. I don’t know why Boris, but I forget, I speak like a five year old and I am afraid of air travel.

    Or something.

    Plus I can’t remember the names of anyone I went to the party with, nor anyone one else I accused, except for Christine Blasey Ford.

    Fuck me drunk you have lost about 270 IQ points Boris. I guess Trump really is toxic after all.

  83. JC the super glue is – pause for effect – common sense. To understand the delphic “right thing” one examines the web of circumstances surrounding these words. Reasonable people who heard and/or examined the evidence will conclude that they refer to two ‘favours: Trump sought.

  84. Common sense is desperate and appeal to emotion.

    You should be able to state concisely and logically what crime was committed and how.

  85. FelixKruell

    Mh:

    Do you agree with Iampeter that Donald J. Trump is NOT a businessman?

    Businessman yes. Successful businessman? Not so much…

  86. mh

    Thanks Felix and Boris.

    I think Iampeter’s view that Trump is not a businessman would be a minority view.

    Possibly a minority of one.

  87. Successful businessman? Not so much…

    Oh god. Another millennial public servant with a mortgage and an Audi wants to lecture a billionaire.

  88. dover_beach

    Sondland said that Trump said (paraphrasing) “I want nothing from Zelenski, I just want him to do the right thing”. Linked with other evidence (in particular Guiliani’s statements) the ‘right thing’ is a 2016 investigation and a Bidens inquiry.

    Why is ‘the right thing’ a problem if there is actual wrongdoing? Especially when the previous administration’s VP used his position to end an investigation of his son’s dealings, and had the prosecutor sacked? Why should Biden’s presence in the primaries shield him or his son because the fallout of a trial might ‘advantage’ Trump?

  89. FelixKruell

    Frank:

    Oh god. Another millennial public servant with a mortgage and an Audi wants to lecture a billionaire.

    Which millennial would that be? And which ‘billionaire’?

    I can however lay claim to never having been declared bankrupt…

  90. Iampeter

    Thanks Felix and Boris.

    I think Iampeter’s view that Trump is not a businessman would be a minority view.

    Possibly a minority of one.

    But whether someone is right or wrong isn’t determined by whether their position is in the minority or not.
    Also, you’re evading the far bigger point that you don’t know what capitalism means. Don’t let that stop you from posting on a politics and economics blog. Self awareness is not for you, pfft.

    Anyway, I’ll leave you to keep beclowning yourself in classic Cat fashion.

  91. mh

    I think Iampeter’s view that Trump is not a businessman would be a minority view.

    Possibly a minority of one.

    But whether someone is right or wrong isn’t determined by whether their position is in the minority or not.

    That wasn’t the point. I was just gauging whether those of the Never Trump persuasion were on the spectrum. They appear to be fine, albeit misguided.

  92. Iampeter

    That wasn’t the point. I was just gauging whether those of the Never Trump persuasion were on the spectrum. They appear to be fine, albeit misguided.

    Yea because you’re not a complete spastic that’s beclowned himself and is now trying to evade and double down.

    Keep winning mh! Politics!

  93. bollux

    If anything the Democrats and their supporters on this site were true, just getting rid of Hillary is enough to propel Trump into sainthood. Why even debate Iampeter at all. He’s clearly deranged and probably believes in climate change. You’re not David Marr are you?

  94. nb

    Funny thing is there is a whole industry, well, several industries in fact, trying to find dirt on Trump – to no avail. Cleanest, most open, pollie ever? No wonder they have hysterics. No quid pro quos between the in-gang.
    It’ll be fun to watch as the various reports come out, the Epstein matter gathers steam, electronic voting systems get audited, the Dems select from their scintillating talent pool, Trump wins, the larger newspapers begin to drop. Oh, and locally, the ABC moves to voluntary subscription.
    Greatest show on earth.

  95. 2dogs

    Why is “quid pro quo” bad in this context?

    There is a lot of precedent for the state paying for information relating to crimes.

  96. Zatara

    Kavanagh is a public person in USA. Even with proven malicious intent, he can’t win a court case for libel.

    Not exactly.

    The 1964 case New York Times Co. v. Sullivan established that public officials could win a suit for libel when they could prove the media outlet in question knew either that the information was wholly and patently false or that it was published “with reckless disregard of whether it was false or not”.

    However, when Blase-Ford makes a false accusation of sexual assault against Kavanaugh what she is actually doing is called Criminal Defamation. It would be tried in criminal court as compared to a Libel suit in civil court.

    Had he not been confirmed there is little doubt Kavanaugh would have pressed charges against her and her enablers, not to mention the metoo pilers-on, to clear his name.

Comments are closed.